Schema Theory Flashcards
Schema Theory
- Loftus & Palmer
2. Bartlett
Loftus & Palmer - Eyewitness memory of a car accident
To investigate the effect of leading questions on eyewitness memory
Procedure (Loftus and Palmer)
- 45 undergraduates were shown a video clip of a traffic accident
- they were randomly assigned into 5 groups
- each group were given the same questionnaire to answer except one question was changed
Independent variable (Loftus and Palmer)
the leading question ‘About how fast were the cars going when they [contacted] each other?’ There were 5 experimental conditions, one for each group: contacted, hit, bumped, collided and smashed.
Dependent variable (Loftus and Palmer)
The eyewitness memory, operationalised by the speed estimate in miles per hour given by each eyewitness.
Results (Loftus and Palmer)
The verb smashed yielded the highest mean speed estimate of 40.5 mph, while participants with the verb contacted in their question estimated the lowest mean speeds of 31.8 mph.
Conclusion (Loftus and Palmer)
Loftus and Palmer theorised that the speed estimates varied between conditions because each participant have their own mental idea of what each word means. For example, when we think of the word ‘smashed’ most people would automatically think of a really bad car accident with major trauma. However, when contacted is used, we tend to imagine a minor accident caused by low speeds.
Evaluation (Loftus and Palmer)
- Differences in speeds could be due to response bias factors and not necessarily the manipulated verb meaning the participants may have been uncertain how to estimate the speed, therefor the verbs simply bias the response rather than actually activating a schema. This is a crucial point as it means the influence of schemas can only be inferred and not directly observed.
Bartlett - War of the Ghosts
To investigate how the memory of a story is affected by previous knowledge.
Procedure (Bartlett)
- British participants were told a Native American legend called “The War of the Ghosts
- Participants were allocated into 2 conditions.
Condition 1 (Bartlett)
They were asked to use repeated reproduction. Participants were asked to repeat the story after a short time and then again after a period of days, weeks, months or years.
Condition 2 (Bartlett)
They were asked to use serial reproduction, where they had to recall the story and repeat it to another person.
Results (Bartlett)
No significant difference in the way the story was recalled. In both conditions, the story became shorter over time. It also became more conventional - it retained details that could be assimilated to the cultural backgrounds of the participants. For example, instead of “hunting seals” participants remembered the men to be fishing as well as the word “canoe” being changed for boat. Overall, participants remembered the main themes of the story but changed unfamiliar events to match their own cultural expectations.
Evaluation (Bartlett)
It is difficult to replicate Bartlett’s study as his documents were unspecific. He did not standardise the intervals at which the participants recalled the story. Also, no independent variable was manipulated whilst other factors were held constant to observed the effect on a dependent variable. Researchers have attempted to replicate Bartlett’s findings but have been unsuccessful, thus, indicating low reliability.
However, even though his experiment was carried out in a laboratory, it has high ecological validity as participants did not receive standardised instructions.
